Cases 1 - 10 of 117
THOMAS v. CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION et al
as 2:2023cv00670
Plaintiff:
SHANNON D. THOMAS
Defendant:
CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00264
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00222
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
KINGFLY SPIRITS et al v. RAGGHIANTI et al
as 2:2022cv00268
Plaintiff:
KINGFLY SPIRITS formerly doing business as PORT OF PITTSBURGH DISTILLERY, LLC, MARK WILLSON and EBBREZZA, INC.
Defendant:
BLAKE RAGGHIANTI, DAVID S. KLETT, JUSTINA TUSHAK and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
KINGFLY SPIRITS et al v. RAGGHIANTI et al
as 1:2022cv00050
Plaintiff:
KINGFLY SPIRITS formerly doing business as PORT OF PITTSBURGH DISTILLERY, LLC, MARK WILLSON and EBBREZZA, INC.
Defendant:
BLAKE RAGGHIANTI, DAVID S. KLETT, JUSTINA TUSHAK and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv00094
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2019cv01088
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv01404
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
BAUM v. ADT LLC et al
as 2:2018cv00777
Plaintiff:
TRACEY BAUM
Defendant:
ADT LLC, DOES 1-10 and PROTECT YOUR HOME
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv00121
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
